[Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

[Andrew Harvey]

On Fri, 22 May 2020 at 22:33, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote:

>
>
>
> May 22, 2020, 13:55 by andrew.harvey4 at gmail.com:
>
>
>
> On Fri, 22 May 2020 at 21:44, Daniel Westergren <westis at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Yeah, I guess there's no way to force the user to add a surface tag when
> adding a highway=path. We could also use analyzing tools to look for recent
> edits with only highway=path and comment to users about the use of surface
> etc.
>
>
> I think that's a step too far, while it's nice for people to add extra
> attributes and we should try to make it easier for mappers to discover what
> tags there are and use them, there is no obligation to, the same way a
> building=yes on a node is much appreciated even if it's not traced out in a
> way and has the building type mapped, a lone highway=path is still useful
> alone.
>
> Improving editors would be a better step, such extreme nagging is more
> likely to discourage people.
>

Agreed, though I think the biggest driver for the casual mapper would be to
close the feedback loop so they can actually see this change. ie. making
the default OSM style render width and surface.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200523/29e92ed0/attachment-0001.htm>